1. Which of the statements below most
accurately
describes the intentions of the framers with respect to whether the
Supreme
Court should be given the power to invalidate acts of Congress?

(A) Some delegates thought that the Court
should
have the power to strike down acts of Congress inconsistent with
natural
law, even where no constitutional provisions had been violated.(B) Some delegates believed that the Court
should not be given the power to invalidate acts of Congress.(C) Many delegates probably never gave the
issue of judicial review serious consideration because they thought it
unlikely that Congress would ever act unconstitutionally.(D) All of the above statements are true.

2. In Craig v. Boren, the Court
struck
down Oklahoma's law which allowed 18-year old women to buy 3.2 beer,
but
required men to be 21 to purchase beer. What happens next?

(A) The law is void and any person of any
age
can buy beer.(B) Eighteen-year-old men are free to buy
beer, but the Oklahoma legislature would be free to raise the age for
everyone
to 21.(C) The law remains enforceable as written
until the Oklahoma legislature decides whether to raise the minimum age
to 21 for everyone.(D) Eighteen-year-olds are free to buy beer,
and any attempt by Oklahoma to raise the age to 21 for everyone would
be
unconstitutional.

3. A city adopts an ordinance requiring the
operators of massage parlors to receive licenses from the city. In the
absence of more complete information, what would you say about the
chances
of successfully challenging the ordinance on constitutional grounds?

(A) Weak - the Court probably will uphold
after
applying rational basis test.(B) Strong - the Court will probably strike
down on "right of privacy" grounds.(C) Strong - the Court will probably strike
down on equal protection grounds unless the city also licenses most
other
businesses.(D)Fairly strong - the court will probably
apply middle-tier scrutiny since sex is involved.

4. The U.S. Constitution has as its most
significant
purposes --

(A) Conferring power on national and state
governments(B) Conferring power on the national
government
and limiting the power of national and state government(C) Limiting the power of national and state
government(D) Conferring power on national government
and limiting the power of national and state governments and private
individuals

5. In Plyler v. Doe, the Supreme
Court
held that Texas may not deny a free public education to the children of
illegal aliens. How did the Court justify its decisions?

(A) The statute lacked a rational basis.(B) Alienage is a suspect classification and
Texas could not show it had a compelling interest.(C) Education is a fundamental right and Texas
could not show that the statute was narrowly tailored.(D) The Court held for the aliens on
procedural
grounds.

6. F.A.A. regulations prohibit commercial
airlines
from employing as pilots persons over age 60. The regulation is based
on
evidence that the incidence of serious health problems increases
markedly
in the mid-60's. This F.A.A. regulation could be described as:

7. Which of the following was not
identified
by the Supreme Court in the Carolene Products case to be a
factor
which may justify more careful scrutiny of a statute that disadvantages
a minority group?

(A) The group is underrepresented in the
political
process.(B) The group lacks significant social contact
with groups holding most political power.(C) The group perceives itself as inferior
to other groups in society.(D) The group has been the victim of
discrimination
in the past.

8. Which of the laws below would be
least
likely to raise a significant substantive due process issue under the
analysis
used in Griswold and Roe?

(A) a law prohibiting marriage between
cousins(B) a law establishing grounds for termination
of parental rights(C) a law prohibiting sodomy between
consenting
adults(D) a law prohibiting indecent exposure

9. As interpreted by the Supreme
Court
in Marbury, which of the following statements can be made aboutArt. III, 2?

(A) The original jurisdiction of the
Supreme
Court is set by the Constitution; Congress can neither add to it
nor subtract from it.(B) Congress can add to the Supreme
Court's original jurisdiction, but it can't subtract from it.(C) Congress can subtract from the Supreme
Court's original jurisdiction, but it can't add to it.(D) Congress can make "any exceptions" to
the Supreme Court's jurisdiction it desires.

10. Which of the following theories
about
the applicability of the Bill of Rights to the states can be said to
have
emerged victorious?

11. Which of the following statements best describes the process
of ratification of the Constitution?

(A) Ratification probably would not have occurred without the
promise
to swiftly propose a Bill of Rights.(B) Ratification was a foregone conclusion given the stature of
those attending the Philadelphia Convention.(C) Ratification became possible only because of the efforts of
George Washington, author of The Federalist papers.(D) Ratification occurred largely because opposition to the
Constitution
was weak and disorganized.(E) Ratification would probably not have occurred if not for bribes
paid to state legislators in key states.

12. Which of the following statements most accurately describes
how
the Court has treated statutes that disadvantage indigents?

(A) Indigency is a suspect classification triggering strict
scrutiny.(B) The Court has been sympathetic to claims of indigents when the
state imposes a substantial fee before it confers an important benefit,
but the Court has been unwilling to use the equal protection clause to
help indigents achieve a minimum standard of living.(C) The Court has been particularly unreceptive to claims based
on indigency, and his consistently treated statutes denying benefits to
indigents to rational basis review.(D ) Indigency has been recognized as a quasi-suspect
classification,
and the level of scrutiny is similar to that used in gender cases.(E) The Court has stated that it will use a “sliding scale” analysis
in cases involving indigents.

13. The Ninth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution

(A) Repeals the Seventh Amendment.(B) Imposes a specific limitation on the power of the states to
intrude into matters of privacy.(C) Prohibits the quartering of soldiers in private homes.(D) Provides that the specification of rights in the first eight
amendments isn’t meant to be exhaustive.(E) Guarantees that states shall have powers not delegated to the
Federal Government.

14. Which of the following governmental actions is most likely
vulnerable
to successful constitutional challenge, given the Court’s decisions in
the “right to travel” cases?

(A) A gasoline tax.(B) Highway tolls.(C) Denial of passport.(D) A law requiring state employees to reside in the state.(E) A law limiting public housing to persons who have lived in the
state for at least one year.

15. Assume a state passes a law requiring all uneducable mentally
retarded persons (defined with reference to scores on a standardized
exam)
to be sterilized at age 15. Which of the following is probably
the
weakest argument to use in a constitutional challenge to the law?

(A) Mentally retarded persons have the attributes of a “discrete
and insular minority” and should be treated as a “suspect class”.(B) The law violates the mentally retarded persons’ right of privacy
protected in Griswold and Roe.(C) The right to bear children and raise a family is a fundamental
right triggering strict scrutiny of the classification involved.

16. Which of the following statements about the Takings Clause is
not
accurate?
(A) The government generally may take private property, so long
as it pays just compensation.(B) Private property may not be taken by the government for a
private
use.(C) The Takings Clause applies only to real property, not personal
property.(D) The Supreme Court has not held the Takings Clause violated in
over three decades.(E) Both (C) and (D) are false.

17. Which of the following has not been identified by the
Court as a factor to consider in deciding whether a taking has occurred?

(A) The value of the property involved.(B) Whether the government has interfered with investor-backed
expectations.(C) The value of the property before the government action compared
to its value after the government action.(D) The character of the government action.

18. Which of the following has not been advanced as a major
justification
for the state action requirement?

(A) Equality(B) Liberty(C) Pluralism(D) Principles of federalism

19. Which of the following is most likely to be found to be state
action under the “Public Function” Doctrine?

(A) The maintenance of a private amusement park such as
Disneyland.(B) The operation of a parking ramp.(C) The actions of a volunteer fire department.(D) The actions of a private firm hired by a state to collect
delinquent
taxes.

20. Justice Black argued that the Fourteenth Amendment “absorbed”
the specific guarantees of the Bill of Rights and no more because:

(A) The Bill of Rights contains the most fundamental guarantees
of
liberty.(B) He was told that was the purpose of the Amendment by one
of its framers.(C) He was concerned about having cases decided by the “gut
feelings”
of judges.(D) He wanted to annoy Justice Frankfurter, with whom he had a
long-lasting
feud.

21. Which of the following rules of constitutional
interpretation is NOT generally followed by the U. S. Supreme Court?
(A) As a general rule, if a case can be decided on statutory grounds,
the Court will not reach constitutional issues.
(B) The Court will generally accept state supreme court interpretations
of state statutes.
(C) The Coiurt will not agree to decide a constitutional question when
the state court decision below is supported by an independent and
adequate state ground.
(D) The Court is generally more reluctant to overrule one of its own
precedents decided on constitutional grounds than one of its precedents
decided on statutory grounds.

(22-23.) Amanda owned two collies,
Rehnquist
and Brennan. Before Amanda left on a seven-day trip, she arranged
to have a friend look after Rehnquist and Brennan. The dogs were
kept in the Angst back yard, which was surrounded completely by a high
fence.

The morning after Amanda left on her
vacation,
a Mill Valley city weed inspector visited her property. The city
inspector entered the back yard by opening a latched gate. Upon leaving
Amanda's property, the inspector neglected to latch the gate securely,
and shortly thereafter Rehnquist and Brennan escaped. When
Amanda’s
friend stopped by the next day to feed the dogs, the gate was latched
(apparently
blown shut by the wind) and the back yard was, of course,
dogless.
The friend assumed that Amanda must have decided to take the dogs with
her or left them in a kennel.

After their escape, Brennan and Rehnquist
traveled
down the road to the Nelson family residence. Jake Nelson, no
lover
of dogs, noted the arrival of two large dogs with great alarm.
Jake’s
two young daughters were playing in the yard and he feared for their
safety.
Jake grabbed his rifle and walked out to his front porch. At that
instant, Brennan began to bark and move (some would say playfully; Jake
thought threateningly) in the direction of his two-year old. Jake
fired his gun at Brennan, killing the dog instantly. After the
shooting,
Jake called the Mill Valley police and told them about the incident and
of the presence of a second dog.

The city dogcatcher was dispatched to the
Nelson
residence. Rehnquist was apprehended and brought to the City
Kennel.
A mill Valley ordinance provides that all dogs must either be on a
leash
or on enclosed private property. Dogs found unleashed are to be
brought
to the kennel and maintained there until claimed by their owner.
The law requires that when the name of the dog’s owner is known (as
where
the dog has identifying tags), the owner is to be notified by mail of
the
dog’s capture and informed that he has three days in which to claim the
dog. If a dog is not claimed after three days, city law provides that
the
dog is to be “sold or disposed of in some other manner.” If claimed,
the
dog is returned to the owner after payment of a $100 fine.

Rehnquist wore a name tag which identified
him as the property of Amanda. A notice was left on Amanda's
front
door informing her of the dog’s capture and warning her that the dog
must
be claimed within three days. When Rehnquist was not claimed
within
the period specified by law, he was sold to a Mill Valley business,
Delightful
Meat Products, Inc., for $15.00. Rehnquist was never heard from
again.

Upon her return from her trip, Amanda was
greatly
distressed to learn of the fate of her two pets. She would like
to
sue Nelson and Mill Valley.

Amanda sues Nelson and the City of Mill
Valley,
alleging that she has been deprived of her constitutional rights under
color of state law.

22. What is the likely resolution of
Amanda’s
suit against Nelson for "deprivation of property without due process"?

(A) It will be dismissed because Nelson is
not a state actor.(B) Because the dog's release was caused by
a state actor, Nelson would be seen as "a joint participant" in the
constitutional
violation.(C) Dealing with loose pets, since
normally
a job performed by city animal control personnel, is a "public
function,"
bringing Nelson's actions under the Constitution.(C) It is a close question whether Nelson’s
action will be found to be state action.

23. What is the best constitutional
argument
Amanda has in her suit against Mill Valley?

(A) Selling Rehnquist to a meat product
company
is cruel and unusual punishment.(B) Capturing Rehnquist and taking him to
the kennel was an unlawful seizure.(C) The failure of the city to turn over to
Amanda the $15 sale price of Rehnquist to Amanda constitutes a taking.(D) City laws authorizing the sale or disposal
of captured dogs fail to provide adequate process.(E) Rehnquist was entitled to a jury trial
prior to his sale or disposal.